Smaller cars automatically have a better strength to weight ratio, so don't need as much structural steel in relation to over all weight.

It is the same reason why an ant can carry 100 times its body weight, and we can't.
Smaller is automatically stronger.

Are there a lot of tank-bridge piling incidents?

__________________
January 21, 2013: The End of an ERROR.

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
"The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself."
---Benjamin Franklin

No, they are not wrong because they carefully say ambiguous things that make us make false assumptions.
It is true that if we start making smaller cars, they will come off badly in accidents with older large cars.
But that is not relevant, because smaller cars have fewer accidents in the first place, not all accidents involve 2 cars head on, and if we all try to have the biggest cars, in order to kill others to avoid injury to ourselves, then there will be more deaths in total.

It should be obvious that government agencies are beholding to auto makes since the 1950's, when the auto makes lobbies to end street cars.
If you want proof, consider why DEQ checks pollition in parts per million, instead of totals?
It makes small cars fail, even though they produce far less pollution.
And who profits the most from larger cars?

Because large cars cause far more deaths.
When large cars hit permanent obstacles, they crumple up and collapse more than a small car, because small cars have better strength to weight ratios.
It is the tail end of a large car that crushes the passengers in the large car.

If 2 large cars hit together head on, there are much more likely to be fatalities than if 2 small cars hit head on.

Large cars are killers.

Then get an Escalade, it will look good in your driveway, and you should be able to pick up a used one at a reasonable price.
But if you don't drive much, then you won't be on the road much.
The point is, the average car will get smaller and lighter as gasoline increases in price, and with the decline of the dollar, gasoline is going to increase in price.

You will still be able to buy a huge car or SUV, but if you do you'll be shelling out a couple of hundred bucks every time you stop for gas.
But it's still a free country, and if you want to spend your money on gas, go ahead.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

The funny thing is that it was the Hippies that started the SUV thing.
We used to buy vans, suburbans, travelalls, pickups, etc., because they were less expensive in the used market, and we could carry lots more people all at once. The VW hippie van was probably the first SUV.
But we drove more carefully, and VW vans still got over 30 mpg.

Home Depot rents trucks for only $19/day, so there is no reason to drive one all the time, just to be able to haul bricks 2 times a year.

I have no problem with large vehicles if they are actually carrying alot of stuff. That helps reduce the total number of cars on the road, just like big buses are less wasteful then cars.

Yeah where out to get you. We call ourselves Darwin's Chauffeurs.

__________________
January 21, 2013: The End of an ERROR.

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
"The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself."
---Benjamin Franklin

Yup.
Speed limits are higher in Europe in general, and there are essentially no speed limits on the autobahn.
Still fewer fatalities per mile driven.
It actually turns out that higher speeds reduce the accident rate.
Most accidents happen on slow roads, not highways.
Congested slower roads have higher traffic densities.
High speed highways are safer.

It's all BS. Fact is bigger cars are safer than smaller cars. Anyone who argues that is an idiot. The new standards are a creation of the what is now known as the enviro-industrial complex.

__________________
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money." - Margaret Thatcher

I don't know where you drive, but in my neck of the woods, walls don't suddenly appear on the highway in front of me when I am driving 65 mph.

I'll take my half ton 4x4 against a small car rather than hitting another truck.

I'm not surprised in the least. Regardless, my main collision worry is deer, followed by someone who is either impaired, reckless, or just simply a bad driver.

Agreed, but that is not the real world. In the real world, there are vehicles of many different sizes sharing the same roads. In the real world, there are large animals that suddenly appear before you on the highway. If you think that I am going to voluntarily sacrifice the safety of my family and myself so that some total stranger has a better chance of survival in his sub-compact, you are quite wrong.

See my above reply to Vincent.

No, it is not foolish in the least. It is factual in the REAL world in which I live. Good job completely ignoring the scenarios that I proposed, by the way.

Yes, sometimes the cause of the injuries between an 18 wheeler and a motorcycle is the weight of the 18 wheeler, but sometimes the cause of the injuries is the ground, or a tree. It is also true when a sub-compact and a motorcycle collide, or when two motorcycles collide, that the ground and trees can, and do, cause injuries.

But we will never "all drive cars as light as motorcycles", so your assertion is moot.

I'm not sure that fewer deaths per driver in Europe and Asia proves anything. Regardless, do you have statistics on deaths per miles driven by continent? That might be a more meaningful comparison.

The point is that the inside of the tank becomes like a bridge piling, even when the brakes are applied quickly.

http://www.milvet.state.pa.us/DMVA/D...Safety/sg4.doc